Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25561816›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2014

Treatment outcomes of chemotherapy between unresectable and recurrent biliary tract cancer.

Takashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Yukiko Ito, Ichiro Yasuda, Nobuo Toda, Hiroshi Yagioka, Saburo Matsubara, Keiji Hanada, Hiroyuki Maguchi and 6 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Takashi SasakiTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Hiroyuki IsayamaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Yousuke NakaiTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Yukiko ItoTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Ichiro YasudaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Nobuo TodaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Hiroshi YagiokaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Saburo MatsubaraTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Keiji HanadaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Hiroyuki MaguchiTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Hideki KamadaTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Osamu HasebeTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Tsuyoshi MukaiTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Yoshihiro OkabeTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Iruru MaetaniTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.
Kazuhiko KoikeTakashi Sasaki, Hiroyuki Isayama, Yousuke Nakai, Kazuhiko Koike, Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8655, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate the differences in the treatment outcomes between the unresectable and recurrent biliary tract cancer patients who received chemotherapy.

methodsPatients who were treated with gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy in the previous prospective studies were divided into groups of unresectable and recurrent cases. The tumor response, time-to-progression, overall survival, toxicity, and dose intensity were compared between these two groups.

resultsResponse rate of the recurrent group was higher than that of the unresectable group (40.0% vs 25.5%; P = 0.34). Median time-to-progression of the recurrent and unresectable groups were 8.7 mo (95%CI), 1.2 mo, not reached) and 5.7 mo (95%CI: 4.0-7.0 mo), respectively (P = 0.14). Median overall survival of the recurrent and the unresectable groups were 16.1 mo (95%CI: 2.0 mo-not reached) and 9.6 mo (95%CI: 7.1-11.7 mo), respectively (P = 0.10). Dose intensities were significantly lower in the recurrent groups (gemcitabine: recurrent group 83.5% vs unresectable group 96.8%; P < 0.01, S-1: Recurrent group 75.9% vs unresectable group 91.8%; P < 0.01). Neutropenia occurred more frequently in recurrent group (recurrent group 90% vs unresectable group 55%; P = 0.04).

conclusionNot only the efficacy but also the toxicity and dose intensity were significantly different between unresectable and recurrent biliary tract cancer.

Indexed as

Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiliary Tract NeoplasmsDeoxycytidineDisease ProgressionDrug CombinationsFemaleGemcitabineHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedOxonic AcidProspective StudiesDeoxycytidineDrug CombinationsGemcitabineOxonic AcidS 1 (combination)TegafurBiliary tract cancerChemotherapyPooled analysisRecurrentUnresectable

Identifiers

PMID25561816
PMCPMC4277986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.